1 views

- ANNA UNIVERSITY B.E. ELECTRICAL AND ELECTRONICS ENGINEERING VI - SEMESTER
- Siemens Siprotec 5 Catalog Ed3.0
- Earthing or Grounding
- Fault Level Calculation_Methods
- EE2351-Power System Analysis
- Short Circuit Study
- 1222EDI516
- Safety Testing Oh Machines _IFA
- overcurrent_protection2[1]
- Kimbark Recierre Monopolar
- Ref
- T10107 YR02 P0ZEN 140001_Rev.0_Electrical System Design Criteria
- test sepam 1000 oud
- 51794451 Earthing System Basics
- Below Ground & Above Ground Earthing Calculation
- Lecture 08 - Symmetrical Faults
- PDF Version - PAC World Magazine (2)
- Fault-current-calculation-V7-1(1).xls
- P12x en AP a00 Appl Note
- Fault analysis

You are on page 1of 8

Calculations for Grounding Transformers for

Photovoltaic Plants

M. Ropp, Member, IEEE, D. Schutz, Member, IEEE, C. Mouw, Member, IEEE

Abstract— Due to concerns about ground fault recommendations for calculating the correct current to be

overvoltage, increasing numbers of North American used in IEEE 367 ground potential rise calculations, again

utilities are requiring that PV plants be effectively based on fundamental considerations. The procedures

grounded before an interconnect permit can be issued. presented are demonstrated via examples, and vetted by

This generally equates to a requirement that a grounding testing against simulation results from a detailed 4-wire

transformer be installed, because most PV inverters are feeder model.

not inherently grounded. This requirement creates two

challenges.

First: there is uncertainty amongst PV plant designers Index Terms—Ground fault overvoltage, effective grounding,

as to how to correctly specify these grounding photovoltaics, inverter, distributed generation, grounding

transformers in terms of impedance and current-handling transformer.

capability. The grounding transformer impedance must

balance the concerns of maintaining effective grounding

while not desensitizing utility protection. The ratio-of- I. NOMENCLATURE

impedances method described in IEEE 142 cannot be DG Distributed Generation

applied to inverter-based sources because the inverter GFO Ground Fault Overvoltage

impedances are not well defined. A new recommendation GPR Ground Potential Rise

for the grounding transformer impedance is being GSU Generator Step-Up (transformer)

proposed in IEEE 1547.8, but many developers and field

engineers are either unaware of it, or are not clear on how II. INTRODUCTION

to use it, and in any case this recommendation does not

address how to find the short-duration and steady-state

current ratings.

M ANY US utilities are starting to require that PV power

plants be “effectively grounded” so that these plants will

not cause a ground fault overvoltage (GFO) on a three-

Second: ground potential rise calculations are also

phase four-wire feeder after the utility breaker opens. GFO is

needed often in this situation, but for PV grounding

a phenomenon that can occur if an ungrounded voltage source

transformers there is uncertainty regarding proper

feeds an ungrounded feeder containing a single-phase to

quantification of the current that leads to the ground

ground fault, resulting in a phase-to-ground overvoltage on the

potential rise. The existence of this problem is

unfaulted phases. The GFO phenomenon is well-known in

acknowledged in IEEE 367 Clause 4.4, but in the case of

rotating generators [1], but there is an ongoing debate about

PV grounding transformers, there is no clear guidance on

how to think of this phenomenon with inverter-based

how to solve it. This is especially true in the case in which

distributed generation that acts as a current source [2]. Until

the PV distribution or GSU transformer H and X neutrals,

that debate is resolved, utilities are understandably erring on

along with the grounding transformer neutral, all share

the side of caution, meaning that increasing numbers of

the same grounding electrodes, which is the most common

interconnect permits for inverter-based distributed generation

configuration in the field.

(DG) will run into utility policy requiring effective grounding.

This paper provides background on these problems, and

There is thus a need for a grounding transformer design

presents: a) a simple, fundamentally-based procedure for

procedure that is simple and minimally situationally-specific,

sizing PV grounding transformers that utilizes the IEEE

and that requires a minimum of input data from the utility, but

1547.8 recommendation and yields defensible but not

that still results in a grounding transformer specification that is

rigorously defensible. This paper proposes such a procedure.

Manuscript received September 11, 2014. This work was supported by Inclusion of a grounding transformer also gives rise to the

Advanced Energy Industries and Gerlicher Solar. possibility of ground potential rise (GPR) becoming an issue

M. Ropp, D. Schutz and C. Mouw are with Northern Plains Power at the DG site. This paper also suggests a method for

Technologies, Brookings, SD 57006 USA (phone: 605-692-8687; email: determining the fault current for use in GPR calculations.

michael.ropp@northernplainspower.com).

2

III. GROUNDING TRANSFORMER SIZING However, for consistency with standard practice, that factor is

not considered here, and its exclusion will lead to a

A. Procedure

conservative design recommendation for the grounding

1) Fundamental considerations transformer.

Consider the generic distribution feeder shown There are several ways of obtaining the needed zero-

schematically in Figure 1. The utility source is at the left, and sequence path. One way is to connect the DG to the feeder

it serves the feeder through a substation transformer that using a Yg-delta distribution transformer, with the Yg on the

grounds the feeder, marked here as a delta-Yg. For simplicity, feeder side and probably grounded through a grounding

no loads are shown. At the right end of the distribution feeder reactor to control the fault current contribution. When viewed

is an inverter-based DG (a PV plant in this case), assumed from the Yg (feeder) side, this transformer provides a zero-

here to be tied to the feeder through a Yg-Yg distribution sequence path to ground through its delta winding [3] and

transformer. The PV plant has a grounding transformer, prevents GFO for faults on the distribution feeder. In this

shown here as a Yg-delta but which could also be a zigzag. configuration, a ground fault on the 480 V bus will result in a

GFO driven by the utility source. Thus, in this case it might

still be necessary to include a grounding transformer on the

distribution transformer LV bus.

plant and a Yg-delta grounding transformer.

phase fault to ground occurs. To understand this situation,

consider Figure 2, which shows the sequence networks for

Phase A of the feeder in Figure 1 under a single-phase fault on

the PV plant 480 V bus, before opening of the substation

breaker. The top loop is the positive sequence network, the

middle loop is the negative sequence, and the bottom loop is

the zero sequence. The variables used in Figure 2 are listed in

Table 1. Derivation of the sequence networks and

interconnecting them to represent the single-phase fault is

explained in [3-5].

When unfaulted, the sequence networks are decoupled, and

since there are no sources in the negative or zero sequence

networks there are no currents in those loops. When the

Figure 2. The sequence networks of the generic feeder in Figure 1, including

single-phase fault occurs, the sequence networks become a single-phase fault on the PV plant 480 V bus.

coupled at the fault point through the fault impedance ZF.

Figure 2 shows that the inverter’s zero-sequence shunt Table 1. Variable names used in Figure 2.

impedance is infinite. This is true for most (but not all) DG IPVa1 Positive-sequence PV output current

inverters. While the utility is still connected, the substation Va1 Positive-sequence utility source voltage

transformer provides a path for zero-sequence currents, Z1,source; Z2,source; Z0,source Positive, negative and zero-sequence utility

source impedances

through the substation grounding impedance Z0,gnd,sub. Z1,line; Z2,line; Z0,line Positive, negative and zero-sequence impedances

However, when the utility’s overcurrent protection detects the of the distribution feeder between the substation

fault and opens, the feeder is cut off from the substation and the fault

transformer and Z0,gnd,sub. If the grounding transformer Z1,disttx; Z2,disttx; Z0,disttx Positive, negative and zero-sequence impedances

of the distribution transformer

impedance Z0,g were not present in Figure 2, the DG would not

Z1,inv,s; Z2,inv,s; Z0,inv,s Positive, negative and zero-sequence series

provide a path for the zero-sequence current, which would impedances of the inverter

then have to flow through the zero-sequence impedance of the Z1,inv,sh; Z2,inv,sh; Z0,inv,sh Positive, negative, and zero-sequence shunt

phase-ground connected load, the charging capacitances of the impedances of the inverter

feeder conductors, and any other phase-ground connected Z1,g; Z2,g; Z0,g Positive, negative and zero-sequence impedances

of the grounding transformer

impedances, such as arrestors. These phase-ground connected Z0,gnd,sub Substation grounding impedance (if not includes

loads and elements are not included in the sequence network in Z0,source)

diagram. This is standard practice, but this exclusion can Zf Fault impedance

cause an interpretation problem when dealing with inverter-

based DGs acting as current sources, because after opening of If a Yg-Yg distribution transformer is used to connect the

the utility breaker it is these elements that provide the path for DG to the feeder, then a separate grounding transformer can

the DG currents. The phase voltages and any resulting GFO be used to effectively ground the PV plant, and this

will then be determined by the DG phase currents and the configuration is the topic of the present paper. Grounding

current-voltage relationship of the Yg-connected load. transformers are either Yg-delta or zigzag types, both of which

3

provide the finite zero sequence shunt impedance needed to result is obtained. Then, the grounding transformer reactance

mitigate GFO. It is assumed that the grounding transformer is and resistance, Xg and Rg, are found using these relationships:

connected on the LV side of the distribution transformer.

The grounding transformer must have sufficient current- (2)

handling capability to survive three sets of conditions: the

fault current that flows after the fault strikes but before the

utility breaker opens, the fault current that flows after the (3)

utility breaker opens but before the PV trips, and the steady-

state circulating current that will flow in the grounding

transformer due to phase-phase voltage imbalance under For example, a 500 kVA (500 kW) inverter connected at 480

normal unfaulted operating conditions. Inverter fault current V has a Zbase,PV of 0.4608 , so the required Xg of the

contributions are limited; during the fault, the inverter current grounding transformer would be 0.276 , and the grounding

will typically be on the order of 1.2 times the inverter’s rated transformer’s Rg value can be anything less than or equal to

current [6], meaning that the PV fault current contribution will 69.1 m. The value of 60% of Zbase,PV corresponds to a

be much smaller than the utility-driven fault current that flows steady-state fault current contribution of about 167% of the

before disconnection. Thus, the fault current flowing after PV nominal current, which is a conservative value. In this

initiation of the fault but before the utility breaker opens will document, we will assume that Rg = Xg/4 (i.e., the maximum

be the current that determines the short-term current handling allowed Rg value), because this minimizes the grounding

capability the transformer must possess. The steady-state transformer size without violating the requirements for TOV

circulating current can also be sizeable, depending on the prevention. In general, one should also allow for a tolerance

transformer impedance and the level of phase-phase voltage band on these impedances, so in this paper a ±10% tolerance

imbalance expected on the feeder. on the impedance values is assumed.

Figure 1 shows a representation of a generic distribution

2) Grounding transformer electrical specification feeder with a PV plant and a grounding transformer on the PV

To electrically specify the grounding transformer, one must plant’s 480 V bus. This is the configuration that will be

specify six parameters: the transformer’s nominal terminal considered throughout this document. This basic

voltage (assumed here to be 480 VLL,RMS), the zero-sequence configuration is the same whether a zigzag or Yg-delta

current required and its duration (taken here to be 2 sec), the grounding transformer is used.

continuous circulating current the transformer must endure

due to steady-state phase-phase voltage imbalance on the B. Grounding Transformer Sizing Results

feeder, and the transformer’s zero-sequence impedances R0 1) Calculation of the steady-state circulating current

and X0. The strategy used here is to first find the transformer rating

impedances, and then use those to calculate the transformer’s The steady-state circulating current in the grounding bank

needed fault current and continuous current withstand arises because of the zero-sequence component of the

capabilities. unbalanced distribution feeder phase voltages. Denote the

There are two methods by which the transformer impedance circulating current by Ig’. Looking at Figure 2, the DG

is commonly specified. One is from IEEE-142 [7] and appears on the right of each of the sequence networks. It is

involves setting the grounding transformer impedances (R0 usually assumed that the DG current is entirely positive

and X0) so that the ratios of R0/X1 and X0/X1 of the circuit sequence, so the DG current source becomes an open circuit in

without the utility connected result in a TOV of 120% or less. the negative and zero sequences. Because we are concerned

This process involves drawing the sequence network circuit, with the time period between the initiation of the fault and

and the R0, X0 and X1 values referred to in the ratios are those opening of the utility breaker, we will assume that the DG

of the circuit, again with the utility disconnected. Usually, the inverter’s shunt impedances in the sequence domain, Z1,inv,sh

recommended values for the ratios are X0/X1 ≤ 3, and R0/X1 ≤ and Z2,inv,sh, are large enough at 60 Hz relative to the other

1. However, this definition can be difficult to use with impedances in the circuit that the currents through them can be

inverters because it is difficult to properly define the inverter’s neglected while the utility is still connected.

positive- and negative-sequence impedances. Because of the open circuit at the far right of the zero-

The other means for finding the transformer impedances sequence network, the DG’s zero-sequence impedance is

appears in an appendix to draft standard IEEE 1547.8 [8]. In entirely determined by the impedance of the grounding

this approach, one first finds the impedance base of the transformer. Also, notice that the grounding transformer only

inverter, Zbase,PV, as follows: appears in the zero sequence network. Because the grounding

transformer is not serving load on its secondary windings

(1) (which is usually, but not always, true), there is an open circuit

on the secondary side of the grounding transformer’s positive

and negative sequences, so only zero sequence currents can

where VPV is the line-to-neutral PV plant terminal voltage and flow in the grounding transformer.

SPV is the plant’s rated output apparent power per phase in VA. Because the impedance of the grounding transformer is

Note that 1) SPV usually equals PPV because PV plants known from Equations (2) and (3), it is now possible to find

normally operate at unity power factor; and 2) if one uses the the circulating current Ig’ by determining the zero-sequence

line-line voltage and total three-phase SPV, the same numerical voltage across the grounding bank as a function of the phase-

4

Ig’. and

.

The first step in this process is to determine an expression Substituting these relationships into Equation (9) and

for the zero-sequence voltage across Z0,g that results from a performing the indicated algebra, the following result is

given level of phase-phase voltage imbalance. To obtain this obtained:

relationship, we first write expressions for the phase voltages

expressing the level of unbalance. For generality, we will (10)

allow for different levels of imbalance on each phase. We will

assume the Phase A voltage Va to be the reference, so that it

has a magnitude of 1 per unit and a phase of zero. Then, let Equation (10) gives the zero-sequence voltage as a function of

the ratio of Vb to Va be x and the ratio of Vc to Va be y. This the percent imbalance, under the assumptions described above.

can be written: Now the circulating current can be found using the circuit in

Figure 2 by setting the voltage across the grounding

(4)

transformer impedance equal to the zero-sequence voltage at

(5) that point and using Ohm’s Law:

components of this unbalanced set of voltages are: (11)

performed using the MATLAB/Simulink model in Figure 3

and a well-validated manufacturer-specific inverter model [2],

suggest that Equation (11) consistently underpredicts the

Substituting Equations (4) and (5) into (6) and carrying out the continuous current expected to flow in the grounding

top line of the matrix multiplication to get Va0, the following transformer. The reason is that two of the assumptions that

expression results: were used to simplify Equation (8) to Equation (10) are not

entirely valid. First, in the real world, the phase imbalance is

(7)

not symmetrical. For example, for x = 1 and y = 1.05, the

magnitude of Va0 from Equation (9) becomes 15% larger than

Note that the general form of Equation (7) for arbitrary x and y for the symmetrical case of x = 0.975, y = 1.025 (P = 5% in

and for arbitrary phase shifting between phases, would be: both cases). Figure 4 shows a surface plot of the magnitude of

Va0, relative to the P = 5% case, as a function of x and y. Note

(8) that for feeder imbalances up to 10%, which is a larger value

than expected in practice, the largest value seen in the surface

where b and c are the Phase B and Phase C phase shifts plot in Figure 4 is 2.0. Second, under unbalanced conditions,

relative to Phase A. Equation (8) will become important the phase voltages are not necessarily spaced by 120o.

shortly, but for the time being, we rewrite Equation (7) in Simulations conducted using the MATLAB model shown in

rectangular form, making use of the fact that Figure 3 suggest that for 5% imbalance or greater, b and c

may be shifted by two or three degrees on each phase. The

primary impact of the phase separation being different than

and . 120o is imperfect cancellation of terms in Equation (8). Figure

5 shows a surface plot of the magnitude of Va0, relative to the

case of P = 5% and normal phase shifts, as a function of b

This gives: and c. Figure 5 suggests that Equation (8) is quite sensitive

(9) to changes in the phases, with the change in the magnitude of

Va0 approaching a factor of 4, but fortunately in practice the

phase changes are rarely such that the change in Va0 is very

Equation (9) is a generalized expression for the magnitude of large, and this factor can be neglected.

Va0 for arbitrary values of x and y but for b = 120o and c = - To get an exact value, one should use Equation (8) directly,

120o. An additional simplifying assumption can be made: for but in the planning stage one does not know the values of x, y,

planning calculations, the phase-phase voltage imbalance is b or c. Thus, to arrive at an equation that gives a realistic

often approximated by assuming that the Phase B and C value but maintains the simplicity of Equation (11), based on

voltages are equally spaced from the Phase A voltage. For the results in Figures 4 and 5, the proposed procedure is to

example, if the total imbalance is 5%, then Phase B would be double Equation (11), resulting in Equation (12).

assumed to be 2.5% above Phase A and Phase C would be

2.5% below. Define P to be the percent imbalance between

the phases. Then, (12)

5

on the order of an ohm or larger (which would be unusual in

practice; for well-designed substations, this value should be in

the low hundreds of milliohms). Thus, it would be prudent to

simply use the worst-case value of fault current and set the

fraction equal to 100%:

(13)

Figure 3. Generic feeder model and inverter used to test the grounding the PV plant’s contribution to the fault current. If for a

transformer design equations.

particular inverter that assumption is questionable, the

inverter’s fault current contribution should be added to Ig, but

in most cases that should be unnecessary.

C. Example grounding transformer sizing results

Table 2 shows the calculated X0, Ig, and Ig’ for three sizes of

PV plant and two planning levels of phase-phase voltage

imbalance. The interconnection voltage is assumed to be 480

VLL,RMS. For the Ig and Ig’ results, the ±10% tolerance band on

the transformer impedances has been taken into account (i.e.,

the currents were calculated using 90% of the transformer

Figure 4. Surface plot of the magnitude of Va0, relative to its magnitude for impedance shown in Table 2 in Equations (12) and (13)).

the symmetrical P = 5% case, as a function of x and y.

Table 2. Example grounding transformer sizing results, assuming a 480 V

interconnect voltage and 10% tolerance on the transformer impedance.

PV plant size (kW)

Expected imbalance 600 1400 3500

Z0 (ohms) 0.058+j0.23 0.025+j0.099 0.0099+j0.039

2.0% Ig' (A) 15 35 87

Ig (A) 1300 3025 7563

Z0 (ohms) 0.058+j0.23 0.025+j0.099 0.0099+j0.039

2.5% Ig' (A) 19 44 109

Ig (A) 1300 3025 7563

Figure 5. Plot of the magnitude of Va0, normalized to the case of P = 5% at

normal phase shifts (±120o), as a function of b and c.

A. Procedure

Once the decision is made to include a grounding

If P is the expected percent imbalance expressed as a fraction, transformer at a DG installation site, it may become necessary

Va1 is the pre-fault positive sequence voltage (VRMS,LN), and Zg to ensure that ground potential rise (GPR) does not become a

is the complex impedance (R0 + jX0) of the grounding problem, particularly if there are conductive (i.e., not fiber or

transformer expressed in ohms, then Ig’ will be the circulating microwave) communications channels to the PV site.

current in amps. The GPR at the site is the product of the impedance to

Comparison against simulation results indicates that remote earth and the current that flows through it. The

Equation (12) consistently overpredicts the value of Ig’, impedance that should be used in this calculation is typically

thereby providing a conservative design. calculated using the procedure described in IEEE-367 [9].

However, it is fairly common that engineers will use the

2) Calculation of the fault current withstand rating utility’s calculated single-phase fault current in this

The fault current withstand capability of the grounding calculation, along with a fault current division factor that

transformer can be calculated using a procedure similar to that accounts for the division of current among the various

used to find the circulating current. Because the zero- grounding paths in the circuit (also from [9]). The problem

sequence impedance is known, if the zero-sequence voltage with this practice is that the utility’s fault current calculation is

during a fault were known, then Ohm’s Law gives the fault normally done with the fault impedance and grounding

current withstand requirement. The key lies in determining a electrode impedances all set to zero. This leads to a

reasonable value for the zero-sequence voltage during a fault. contradiction, because the resistances that are set to zero in

We know from Figure 2 that the sequence networks create an this calculation are part of the physical mechanism that creates

impedance divider such that the zero-sequence voltage will be GPR in the first place. Thus, using the utility’s single-phase

some fraction of Va1. Examples in the literature [3] and from fault current as the starting point leads to GPR values that are

simulation results suggest that Va0 values can be as high as too high. The purpose of this section is to propose a more

accurate symmetrical component model for calculating the

6

involving a PV plant grounding transformer.

Figure 6 shows a circuit diagram of a distribution feeder

including the substation source, feeder impedance, a single-

phase fault applied to Phase A on the MV side of the

distribution transformer, a Yg-Yg generator step-up

transformer, and a grounding transformer, shown here as a

zigzag transformer. The phases are color-coded to make the

diagram easier to read. Fault current flows from Phase A to

ground through the fault, and re-enters the system via the

grounding electrodes as shown. The sequence networks that

correspond to this situation are shown in Figure 7. The fault

impedance, ZF, and the “grounding impedance” seen by the

fault, RFgnd, are shown separately. For present purposes, the

fault impedance ZF can be neglected because in most cases it

is much less than RFgnd. The sequence network in Figure 7 can

now be solved to determine the single phase to ground fault

current that can be used as a starting point in a GPR

calculation. Figure 8 shows the sequence networks for the

situation in which the fault is on the LV side of the

distribution transformer. Figure 7. Sequence networks for an SLG fault on the MV bus, including the

In general, it will be easiest to solve these sequence network impedances to remote earth.

circuits using a circuit simulator like PSpice. The reason is

because the zero-sequence networks in Figures 7 and 8 form

the Wheatstone bridge configuration, and this causes the

closed-form solution of this circuit to be cumbersome for by-

hand calculations. Figure 9 demonstrates how the zero-

sequence network in Figure 7 can be redrawn as a Wheatstone

bridge.

Figure 6. Distribution feeder with a Yg-Yg distribution transformer, Figure 8. Sequence networks for an SLG fault on the LV bus, including the

grounding transformer, and an SLG fault on Phase A. impedances to remote earth.

In addition, it is important to realize that when the Equation (13) is obviously not a new result [10], but many of

distribution transformer’s H-side and X-side neutrals share the the newer reference books used today, especially by younger

same grounding electrode, which is commonly the case, the power engineers trying to understand transformers and

zero-sequence impedance of the distribution transformer, symmetrical components, do not cover this case of a Yg-Yg

Zadisttx0, as seen from the MV side, is given by [10]: transformer with a common H-X neutral.

If the inverter-side voltage of the PV distribution

transformer is 480 V and the feeder-side voltage is 12.47 kV,

(13)

then N 26, so that

transformer referred to the MV side, N is the turns ratio, and

ZG is the impedance to remote earth along with any

deliberately-added grounding impedance.

7

Because ZG will have a value of several ohms in most cases The yellow block at the far right end of the feeder contains

and is multiplied by 3, neglecting this term can introduce a a PV plant and grounding transformer. The contents of that

significant error into the calculated zero-sequence impedance. yellow block are shown in Figure 11, in which the orange

block at the center is the Yg-Yg generator step-up transformer,

the yellow blocks at the upper left are the PV inverter

modules, and the solid green block is the grounding

transformer. Using switches and the red blocks at the bottom

of Figure 11, an SLG fault can be applied directly to the MV

or LV bus of the distribution transformer.

Figure 11. Contents of the yellow block at the right in Figure 10.

using the detailed model as the reference. Results are shown

for a fault on the LV side of the Yg-Yg distribution

transformer, and on the MV side. According to these results,

the symmetrical component model produces essentially the

same results as the highly detailed model, and thus is a

reasonable representation of the situation.

Figure 9. Demonstration that the zero-sequence network in Figure 7 can be Table 3. RMS GPR predicted by detailed and sequence network models of

redrawn as a Wheatstone bridge, where Za’ = Zasource0 + Zaline0 + Zadisttx0. the feeder model described in [11].

Case Detailed model Seq net model Percent

description result (Vrms) result (Vrms) error

B. Testing via simulation

LV-side fault 272.2 271.8 -0.15%

The use of the sequence networks to determine GPR was MV side fault 38.7 38.0 1.81%

tested by building the sequence network model in

MATLAB/SimPowerSystems, and comparing it against a

highly detailed model of the feeder in Reference [11], also in V. CONCLUSIONS

SimPowerSystems. The feeder in [11] was designed to test

TOV and GPR situations, and [11] includes validation data for Until there is a resolution to the ongoing debate over whether

the feeder model, so this selection of test system makes sense inverter-based DG requires effective grounding, there is a

for present purposes. In the symmetrical component model, need for:

the GPR at the PV plant is the voltage that appears across a) a simple, robust design procedure for electrically

RPVgrid in Figures 7 and 8. The detailed MATLAB/Simulink specifying grounding transformers that does not involve

model is shown in Figure 10. The green block is the excessive overdesign but still meets safety and reliability

substation, and the separate feeder segments are the black and needs; and

white blocks. The red-outlined blocks are locations at which b) a means for calculating the correct current for determining

faults can be applied. The solid blue blocks are measurement GPR, especially when the GSU transformer H and X

blocks. neutrals share the same ground electrodes with the

grounding transformer.

intended to meet both of these needs, and it is hoped that these

procedures will help in removing a barrier to deployment of

PV in distribution systems while maintaining system safety

and security.

Figure 10. Model of the distribution feeder described in [11], with a PV

plant and grounding transformer added in the yellow block at the far right (see

Figure 11).

8

VI. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors gratefully acknowledge a) the financial support of

Advanced Energy and Gerlicher Solar, and b) the invaluable

technical assistance of Tom Yohn, Michael Beanland, Marc

Johnson, Matthew Charles, and Lou Gasper.

VII. REFERENCES

[1] H. B-L. Lee, S. Chase, R. Dugan, “Overvoltage Considerations for

Interconnecting Dispersed Generators With Wye-Grounded Distribution

Feeders”, IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, vol.

PAS-103 No. 12, December 1984, p. 3587-3594.

[2] M.E. Ropp, M. Johnson, D. Schutz, S. Cozine, “Effective Grounding of

Distributed Generation Inverters May Not Mitigate Transient and

Temporary Overvoltage”, Proceedings of the 2012 Western Protective

Relay Conference, September 2012.

[3] P. M. Anderson, Analysis of Faulted Power Systems, originally

published by Iowa State University Press 1973, republished by IEEE

Press 1995, ISBN 9780780311459. (This book is now available online

free of charge from the IEEE.)

[4] J. Blackburn, Symmetrical Components for Power Systems Engineering,

CRC Press 1995, ISBN 9780824787676.

[5] J. Glover, M. Sarma, T. Overbye, Power System Analysis and Design,

5th ed., Cengage Learning 2012, ISBN 9781111425777.

[6] Microgrids: Architectures and Control, ed. N. Hatziargyriou, pub. IEEE

Press 2014, ISBN 9781118720684. See page 123.

[7] IEEE Std 142-2007, “IEEE Recommended Practice for Grounding of

Industrial and Commercial Power Systems” (the Green Book).

[8] See IEEE 1547.8, Draft 2.0, November 2011, Appendix C, pg 147.

[9] IEEE Standard 367-2012: “IEEE Recommended Practice for

Determining the Electric Power Station Ground Potential Rise and

Induced Voltage from a Power Fault”.

[10] Electrical Transmission and Distribution Reference Book, pub.

Westinghouse Electric Corporation, 1964. See Table 7, page 804, entry

A-2.

[11] J. Acharya, Y. Wang, W. Xu, “Temporary Overvoltage and GPR

Characteristics of Distribution Feeders with Multigrounded Neutral”,

IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery 25(2), April 2010, p. 1036-1044.

Nebraska in 1992, and the MS and PhD in EE from the Georgia Institute of

Technology in 1996 and 1998 respectively. He is the President and Principal

Engineer of Northern Plains Power Technologies, and is a registered

Professional Engineer in SD and HI. He has 17 years’ experience and >50

publications in power engineering, power electronics, and photovoltaics.

and MS in Electrical Engineering in 2011, both from South Dakota State

University. Mr. Schutz has wide-ranging experience in power electronics,

embedded control systems, and power electronics and power system

simulation. His current work focuses on multi-inverter islanding scenarios

and microgrid controls.

Chris Mouw received the BSEE from South Dakota State University in 2008.

Mr. Mouw is presently with Northern Plains Power Technologies, Brookings,

SD, where he works on all aspects of modeling of electric power systems with

power electronics, automation of modeling, and many types of studies for

utilities.

- ANNA UNIVERSITY B.E. ELECTRICAL AND ELECTRONICS ENGINEERING VI - SEMESTERUploaded byeldhosejm
- Siemens Siprotec 5 Catalog Ed3.0Uploaded byabes1234
- Earthing or GroundingUploaded byAdithya Hariram
- Fault Level Calculation_MethodsUploaded byPichumani
- EE2351-Power System AnalysisUploaded byNadeem Khalid
- Short Circuit StudyUploaded byAhmedRaafat
- 1222EDI516Uploaded byShashi Ranjan
- Safety Testing Oh Machines _IFAUploaded byMarco Loia
- overcurrent_protection2[1]Uploaded byCharles37x
- Kimbark Recierre MonopolarUploaded byIvan Moisés Reducindo Alvarez
- RefUploaded byKuntal Satpathi
- T10107 YR02 P0ZEN 140001_Rev.0_Electrical System Design CriteriaUploaded byRahul Srivastava
- test sepam 1000 oudUploaded byCornelissen
- 51794451 Earthing System BasicsUploaded byShahid Parvaiz
- Below Ground & Above Ground Earthing CalculationUploaded byPramod B.Wankhade
- Lecture 08 - Symmetrical FaultsUploaded byPoor Adam
- PDF Version - PAC World Magazine (2)Uploaded bynutchai2538
- Fault-current-calculation-V7-1(1).xlsUploaded byjadi purwono
- P12x en AP a00 Appl NoteUploaded byRinda_Rayna
- Fault analysisUploaded byহাসিন মুসাইয়্যাব আহমাদ পুণ্য
- Tute4_newUploaded byMicheal Lordy
- Ltmotor GeneralUploaded byRamesh Cuppu
- CHAPTER 1 ContinueUploaded bySafina Syg
- History of Grounding Earthing Practices in the United StatesUploaded byObatai Khan
- B414026.pdfUploaded byChetan Kotwal
- Course Plan_EEE 4731Uploaded byAshik Ahmed
- 5100334-00A01 Salwico Cruise Service & Maintenance Manual EUploaded bySimonaMauna
- Development of GIS Fault Section Detection System 20110429Uploaded byKim Do Won
- IARJSET 15Uploaded byherve
- Electrical Power engineeringUploaded byFawad Hassan

- IEC WP Artificial Intelligence Across Industries Hyperliens LRUploaded bywebambulist
- Gland SizeUploaded bywebambulist
- Diplomarbeit.pdfUploaded bywebambulist
- 328751578 GIS UHF Partial Discharge on-line Monitoring Device EvaluationUploaded bywebambulist
- substation DesignUploaded byDundikumar
- ABB QT10 - Photovoltaic PlantsUploaded byBernardMight
- FAQUploaded byNikhil Meshram
- Substation GroundingUploaded bygosalhs9395
- Designing Safe and Reliable Grounding in AC Substations With Poor Soil Resistivity an Interpretation of IEEE Std. 80Uploaded byandhrimnir
- 13666_14Uploaded bywebambulist
- earthing calculation.pdfUploaded bycdsenthil
- Grounding Electrode.pdfUploaded byDINESH
- Establishing GPR and ZOI MD-018-WebUploaded bywebambulist
- Fangxing Li Ieeepes2009 5Uploaded bywebambulist
- Brochure Connecting Wind Power to the Grid EnUploaded byLuong the khang
- carr.pdfUploaded bywebambulist
- B Section1Uploaded bywebambulist
- 159_Changes in IEEE80Uploaded byLectorAnonymus
- Uk Abb Furse Catalogue UkUploaded byJaka Budi Santoso
- 12.9Uploaded byAtakan
- CT - Beyond Knee Point VoltageUploaded bywebambulist
- Grounding High VoltageUploaded bySujit Adhya
- Principals of Electrical GroundingUploaded byAnanda Padmanabhan
- @Practical Guide to Electrical Grounding, 1st Edition, 1999Uploaded bycyong7788

- SK 3290100 RittalUploaded byAlessandro Oliveira
- _01_GENOPUploaded byjhuskanovic
- ee2355 dem syllabusUploaded byapi-252855727
- IS - 00996 - 2009.pdfUploaded bysangitaghaisas
- 3BHS814079E01 Wiring Diagram R4Uploaded byRoy Chai
- Proper Use of Cable Glands for Connection to Conduit PipeUploaded byRajmohan
- Raymond OPC 5400.pdfUploaded byEdisson Torres
- Acd-A Manual Rev1.4_engUploaded byAntonio Francisco da Silva Filho
- 11_IJRG16_C08_93.pdfUploaded bymetty
- 24-11A-19_1121Uploaded bypann
- Gac Esd5500Uploaded bychristram
- AttenuatorsUploaded byenglandbro
- blf177Uploaded byEmilio Escalante
- JIMMA Electrical&ComputerEngUploaded byTewodros
- Electric Railway Systems in Common UseUploaded by曾乙申
- Bst Handout e03Uploaded byProdigious Jatt
- ASCO ATSUploaded byJorge andres
- NAME PLATE DETAILS List of Experiments1Uploaded byRavindra Vankina
- CMOS Questions.pdfUploaded bySure Avinash
- Modelling of the Effect of Electrode Geometries on the Corona DischargeUploaded byOscar Gálvez Iglesias
- 106105034Uploaded byg
- DPH42 InstallationUploaded byRoxana Birtum
- Testing and Maintenacne of High Voltage Bushings PsmmCHAP-06Uploaded byprotectionwork
- A123 Grid Brochure MD100120Uploaded bykorada32
- Si826xUploaded byonafets
- 3 Axis TB6560 CNC Driver Board Users ManualUploaded bySibiagny Villegas Arroyo
- Dukane Audio Enhancement SystemUploaded byMillsElectric
- Cathodic protection Indian standardUploaded byXiaohua Chen
- Tri Bo ElectricUploaded byashlesha3
- Module 1Uploaded byAshner Novilla